Mercedes ML350 Bluetec

[Tomzstream]

I have the 2.1L BT inline 4 in my 2014 E-250 and love it. I am getting close to 50 MPG on the Hwy on a routine basis. I would consider an ML250 as I have previously test driven the GLK250 and found it lacking in some creature comforts like the Dynamic Multicontour seats (with massage!) that are available in the ML and E-Class.

Not sure I would want to tow my 4600lb Safari with it, but it is within specs. the ML250 I4 Bluetec has 200 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque vs 240 hp and 455 lb-ft of torque for the outgoing V6 bluetec. A little lacking in the HP perhaps, but plenty of torque. The inline engines excel in that regard. The Optional hitch is a Class III.

I have seen reports of 33 MPG HWY but the official EPA numbers have not yet been released. But that is likely up significantly from the 28 MPG HWY for the current model.

Note that MB has a lot of faith in this little engine and is now equipping the 2500 Sprinters with it as well. AS has yet to release a 4 cyl Interstate, but reports are coming in from Roadtrek Agile owners of excellent mileage ranging in the 30's.

As far as I know, all 2.1L drivetrains come with the 7 speed auto, and ECO start/stop. Works pretty well as far as I can tell.

[cory_can]

Are they changing platforms for the next ML? Your E250 weighs ~800lbs less than the current ML350...the smaller diesel will take some weight out of that delta but they will have to remove a bit more from the rest of the vehicle for a similar driving experience.

[Tomzstream]

Cory, see my revised comments above... The ML chassis remains the same going into 2015. And obviously, the RT Agile is a heavy vehicle as well... A word of advice for those considering a 2500 Sprinter, the 2015 chassis which is just being introduced, will come standard with Crosswind Assist. Well worth waiting for. Not sure if that's available in the ML, but I believe it is in the GL.

When shopping for a Class B, I test drove the 2.1L Agile w 7sp and it was OK. I went with the larger 3500 chassis and V6 Bluetec 5sp based RT Adventurous CS. Interestingly, I had learned that Crosswind Assist was not going to be offered in the 3500 so we went ahead with the purchase prior to the intro of the 2015 chassis but we did wait for the 2014.5 models with the upgraded safety options like BLIS and Lane Keeping Alert.

[jmpgino]

Well as I posted before, I have been considering a Bluetec ML350. It is a 2012, with 42k on is. Dealer wants $44,500 and quite honestly I think I will stick with my Tahoe.
Pulling a 20 footer up into NC mountains I got 13.5 MPG. We are going to get a 25 footer next year and I will see how she handles the new model.
One thing for sure I can buy a hell of a lot of gas for $44,500 even at $5 a gallon. The return % increase on MPG just does not ring my bell. I was back home in England last month and met two blokes who had Diesel vans, they were getting 65 MPG.
THIS BLOODY GOVERNMENT HERE IS THE CAUSE FOR OUR POOR MPG, Europeans expect a return in the high 30's for a gas engine as well.

[dkottum]

This people who elect this bloody government here got tired of air so dirty they could hardly see across the street. We declared independence from Europe in 1776 and have been making our own rules ever since.

[slowmover]

Driving down into Los Angeles in the 1960s was unforgettable

But Euro smog requirements seem better than ours. No doubt to do with trade restrictions more than health. Burning more to pollute less offers no other explanation.



Sent from my iPhone using Airstream Forums

[ciparis]

MPG figures cannot be compared across the Atlantic; they are calculated entirely differently, and European numbers are always higher than the exact same vehicle would receive in the US. It's a simple calculation difference and has nothing to do with anything else.

European vehicles do tend to make do with smaller-displacement engines, so it's also true that as a general rule, European vehicles get better actual mileage across the board. But comparing apples and apples with identical vehicles (ML250 Bluetec 2.1), it's just calculation differences.

As an aside, justifying a price difference in the ML vs Tahoe would be just as much about driving a non-entry-level Mercedes vs driving a Chevy as it would be about diesel vs gas, imho.

[switz]

The British imperial gallon has more ounces than the American gallon, so that skews the mpg numbers.

Also, four liters equals about 1.2 US gallons.

[Tomzstream]

With the ML250 soon to be on dealer's lots, I'd be curious to see how much interest folks have in using that as a tow vehicle. Likewise for the new XC90 T8 Volvo (dual engine hybrid, 4cyl supercharged petrol FWD and electric RWD.)

Hadn't noticed before that MB has a $1500 uplift for all diesel SUVs over their petrol counterparts, even though is some cases the engine is smaller. My 2014 E-250 diesel, was and remains $500 less than the petrol counterpart (E-350).

Have already posted about the Sprinters, and am not at all unhappy with my RT CS with the 6cyl. Getting 20 MPG on a regular basis.

[Wayward]

Originally Posted by Tomzstream

I have the 2.1L BT inline 4 in my 2014 E-250 and love it. ..................Not sure I would want to tow my 4600lb Safari with it, but it is within specs. the ML250 I4 Bluetec has 200 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque .

Those numbers caught my eye.....

The V6 in my F-150 tows a 5200lb Airstream with less oom'ph than that diesel.

Interestingly, the F150 and the E class weigh about the same

With 205 hp and 255 lb-ft of torque....
F150 curb weight is 3,900 lbs.
25' Safari curb weight (UBW) is 5200 lb
Rig weight 9100 lbs


With 200 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque...
E250 curb weight is 4,200 lbs
23' Safari curb weight (UBW) is 4600 lb
Rig weight 8800 lbs

[Tomzstream]

I did a little more digging and the Diesel uplift seems to be due to the Standard 4-Matic for the Diesel as opposed to a charge of $2500 for 4-Matic in the Petrol models (ML350) which puts the price differential of D VS P with 4-Matic at minus $1000. That's a pretty good deal. Towing capacity is in fact the same, and torque is way better in the Diesel, although HP is two thirds that of the Petrol engine...

[Tomzstream]

I forget what the towing capacity for the E350 Station Wagon is, but I think its comparable to the GLK (3500 range). I would expect my sedan is less than that. It has to do with suspension and brakes I am sure. And they just don't offer a diesel in the wagon, otherwise I would have jumped on it. I test drove the GLK250 and performace was good, but the seats did not measure up to my wife's standards. Expect the ML250 to be better in that regard, with adequate performance.

[rostam]

Originally Posted by Tomzstream

Hadn't noticed before that MB has a $1500 uplift for all diesel SUVs over their petrol counterparts, even though is some cases the engine is smaller. My 2014 E-250 diesel, was and remains $500 less than the petrol counterpart (E-350).

Also, Benz GL 350 (diesel) is ~$1500 cheaper than GL450 (entry level gasser engine).

[mikapen]

Originally Posted by jmpgino

I was back home in England last month and met two blokes who had Diesel vans, they were getting 65 MPG.
THIS BLOODY GOVERNMENT HERE IS THE CAUSE FOR OUR POOR MPG, Europeans expect a return in the high 30's for a gas engine as well.

As was posted earlier, British gallons = 1.2 US gallons. So the occasional 35-40 mpg I get with my ML would equate to 42 - 48, and that's not a minivan.
Mountain towing if I stay at 55 mph, I have seen 25 mpg for a day's driving, which would be 30 if I used Brit gallons. (That's with my SOB flat-nosed TT.) Certainly not "POOR MPG."

The new technology using AdBlue is pretty much world-wide. European standards may be tighter than U.S. these days. Including off-road equipment. Hong Kong, too.
AdBlue and SCR actually free up diesel engine design and liberate the engines to greater performance and economy than earlier clean-diesel solutions.
As manufacturers redesign engines to take fuller advantage, we will see further performance gains, likely far more than pre-emission diesel designers ever imagined.
2 liter diesel tow vehicles with 400 lb-ft and 40+ real mpg? Probably soon, and as a direct result of clean diesel requirements. I'm OK with all that.

[switz]

Only the US market denies the existence of the diesel engine option on nearly every model of Mercedes. Big oil does not want economic vehicles here.

I have a lovely late 2002 Mercedes E320 station wagon (called an Estate in the UK) in Birmingham, UK. I have owned that car since it was new. It has the straight 6 3.2 liter turbo diesel engine which was both quicker and 30% more fuel efficient than the same configuration gasoline engine.

Just for grins, go to the UK Mercedes website and see all the engine options that are available else where in the world. Then realize that the ML class was made only in Alabama for years with many diesel engine options. Only in late 2006 were we allowed to order one with the V6 turbo diesel engine.

[mikapen]

Yes, swiz, things have changed a lot in the last 9 years, haven't they?
Now it's hard to name a US M-B model without a diesel variant.

[rostam]

Originally Posted by mikapen

Yes, swiz, things have changed a lot in the last 9 years, haven't they?
Now it's hard to name a US M-B model without a diesel variant.

They should really put a diesel engine in the G class. It has horrendous fuel economy!

[Wayward]

Availability of efficient vehicles in any particular county, is about engine technology vs that country's government environmental regulators, not the oil products that run in those engines.

Diesel engine efficiency does not come from the fuel itself, but from the high combustion temperatures and precise control of injection that diesel fuel allows. Gasoline engine efficiencies will soon approach that of diesels as Gasoline Direct Injection technology improves.

Originally Posted by switz

Big oil does not want economic vehicles here.

Not the case, and in fact, oil companies were part of the consortium that led to the EU emission regulations, specific for diesels, that unleashed high efficiency diesel technology there.

It is the environmentalists, regulators in the US who put the cabash on new diesel technology. US emsison regulations are not based on fuel type so, as diesel injection technology increased combustion pressures and temperatures, US regulations forced expensive low sulfur fuel and particulate matter traps.
Now that gasoline direct injection technology is approaching the efficiency of diesels, combustion pressures and temperatures will force expensive low sulfur gasoline, particulate traps and "Blutech" like contraptions on gasoline cars too.

Europe and the UK are about to end the high efficiency diesel era over there. WHO and other globalist groups which want us out of our own vehicles and into government transit, have declared diesel emissions a carcinogen.

A very serious environmentalist campaign against diesels, based on the WHO "data", is being led by the UK's, Simon Birkett, of Clean Air in London. who said “In terms of harmful air pollutants, diesel exhaust has been a public health catastrophe for Europe”.

Ironically, as the EU prepares to kill off the high efficient diesel market, the US emissions standards may put us in a better position to see new diesel and gasoline injection technology.

So far the US bureaucrats and Chicken Littles have rejected the WHO scare mongering campaign that "diesel engines cause cancer". If that holds, the US diesel market is poised to expand as Europe's declines. Those "evil oil companies" are among the diesel proponents lobbying hard for that market to expand.

As engineers make incredible strides, the regulators continue to throw their wrenches in the works.

Will America Avoid Europe’s ‘Clean’ Diesel Problems?

[Tomzstream]

An interesting read about Diesel in Europe. I loved my last of the iron blocks inline 6 CDI engine in my 2006 E320. While it had a particulate filter, it had no DEF requirement. And if someone insisted on tailgating me I could easily "Smoke" them by stomping on the accelerator and literally leaving then in a cloud of smoke. Of course I would be a mile ahead of them by the time the smoke cleared... It was an amazing engine and the torque at the high end made passing effortless.

One UPSIDE to Europe banning Diesel would be cheaper Diesel here in the US as much of our refinery output of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel goes there. The other big drain on our refinery output this time of year is Heating Oil and as the gas boom continues, more folks, esp in the NE are converting to NatGas for Heat. I don't think Diesel has dropped as much as gasoline percentage wise, at least around here, but that could be due to tax differentials.

I have a Sprinter based RT and wish I could have had my old inline 6 transplanted into it, but for now the 3L 6cyl Bluetec sure beats any Gasoline van out there. But as far as cars go, I love my 2,1L BT diesel in my E250 and am getting over 44 mpg COMBINED long term. And now you can get a Sprinter with the same engine, although only in a 2500 chassis.

Now I agree gassers are catching up, and Volvo is doing some amazing things with their Drive-E 4 cylinder lineup as is Mazda with their SkyActive and of course the local favorite Ford Ecoboost (Turbo technology really borrowed from Volvo). But none of those engines matches the torque of a good diesel and when it comes to towing so it is a real factor in choosing a good TV.

ELECTRIC on the other hand has tremendous torque and is why Diesel Electric Locomotives are the current standard. To that end, I think Volvo is on to something with their XC90 T8 with both Drive E (powering the front wheels) and Electric (powering the rear) motors. While the range in all electric mode is limited, I can see it being useful for when you are creeping along at 5 MPH on the downtown connector in Atlanta Rush-hour(s), pulling an Airstream, and the Electric would be great for supplementing the gas engine on uphill grades when you need that torque boost. I would expect the gas engine to be sufficient while cruising at highway speeds. It will have regenerative braking so all that potential energy put into the TV and Trailer climbing grades or accelerating in traffic, can be recaptured for tackling the next hill or accelerating in stop and go traffic. Have yet to see the mileage estimates or towing specs for this vehicle but it will debut in the US in a few short days at the LA auto show.

Interestingly, I would look to California for leadership on the whole carcinogenic issue of Diesel here in the US, just as they did for the elimination of MTBE additive in gasoline (also a known carcinogen). Still, just like MTBE was used for making cleaner emissions, the Cal stance on Diesel was not always so friendly... I could not buy my CDI in 2006 in Cal (you could bring in used vehicles) and at one point there, they too were considering banning Diesel altogether. It wasn't until the legislature passed a strict global warming inspired CO2 emission standard, that Diesel became acceptable.


With the success of Tesla and some electric plug in hybrids utilizing gas and electric, my guess is this is what the future looks like and not so much diesel. For now, I am happy to be burning oil, albeit in reduced quantities due to the high efficiency of my Mercedes engines.

[rostam]

What I don't understand is why all the EPA MPG numbers for diesel engines are understated. You would be lucky to get the EPA MPG number for a gasser engine (it usually happens only under "ideal" conditions), whereas all diesel vehicles I know, in reality, beat the EPA numbers. Our GL is rated at 17/21 MPG for city/highway, and we get 20/25 regularly, even though my wife drives aggressively (lots of unnecessary acceleration/breaking). Jetta TDI's also get 50 MPG on highway. There seems to be a flaw in the way EPA calculates the MPG.